![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/d246baeefae20788d6ea519b777a99c7.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Dnia 2012-11-04, o godz. 16:38:53
Aditya Mahajan
On Sun, 4 Nov 2012, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
Am 03.11.2012 um 01:45 schrieb Marcin Borkowski
: If I get it correctly, the following two formulae should render differently - and they don't. What is going on?
\setupmathematics[autopunctuation=yes]
\starttext
$(2,5)$ versus $(2, 5)$
\stoptext
Spaces in math mode are ignored because the spacing is controlled by different rules.
\starttext
\m{1.2}\par \m{1. 2}\par \m{1 .2}\par \m{1 . 2}\par
\blank
\m{1,2}
\blank
\setupmathematics[autopunctuation=yes]\m{1,2}
\stoptext
I always thought that autopunctuation was targetted towards the European tradition of using comma as a decimal separator. That behavior can be achieved by changing a comma to be an "ord" from a "punctuation". However, changing the comma to an "ord" has the drawback that you have to explicitly add spaces when comma is needed as a punctuation, for example in sets:
\m{A = \{a,\, b,\, c\}}
Autopunctuation is supposed to get around this: if comma is followed by a non-space, the comma should behave like an "ord"; if it is followed by a space, it should behave like a "punctuation". Clearly that is not happening.
+1 This was exactly what I was expecting. (In LaTeX, there's even a package, called icomma AFAIR, which does more or less this.) As I often write mathematical texts in Polish, such a feature would be *very* useful for me. I could use \digits or \unit, but this has its drawbacks, too.
Aditya
Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University